TCL Europe v Corning (CoA, 7 October 2026)

Dhenne Avocats · 17 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By a procedural order of 7 October 2026 (UPC_CoA_38/2026), the judge-rapporteur of the UPC Court of Appeal declined to hold an interim conference in the appeal brought by TCL Europe SAS against Corning Incorporated, closed the written procedure and listed the oral hearing for Thursday 28 January 2027 at 9 am, at the seat of the Court in Luxembourg. The appeal is directed against the decision of the Munich section of the Central Division of 24 February 2026 (UPC_CFI_337/2025) concerning EP 3 296 274.

Question

Is an interim conference available as of right in appeal proceedings?

Decision

The judge-rapporteur dispensed with the interim conference provided for in Rules 239.1 and 101.1 RoP, as the parties had not shown that one was necessary. He closed the written procedure, noting that the Rules provide for neither a reply nor a rejoinder in an appeal under Rule 220.1(a) RoP. The oral hearing is listed for 28 January 2027.

Key points for practice

• A party seeking an interim conference on appeal must show a concrete need for it, failing which the judge-rapporteur will move straight to the oral hearing.
• In an appeal against a decision on the merits, parties cannot count on a reply or a rejoinder to complete their written case.

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure

Rules 101.1, 220.1(a) and 239.1 RoP

Related decisions

• TCL Europe v Corning, 24 February 2026, the Munich Central Division decision under appeal (UPC_CFI_337/2025).
• TCL Europe v Corning, 1 December 2025, an earlier act between the same parties.

Prepared by Dhenne Avocats from the official decision, consulted on 17 October 2026. The database is updated every week, on Friday. Only the official text is authoritative.